2011: A Rugby year in review, by John O'Neill

By John O'Neill / Roar Rookie

The Roar exclusive: John O’Neill, ARU Managing Director and CEO, reflects on the 2011 rugby year that was, including an explanation on why the current economic models for the Rugby World Cup is unsustainable:

“The Tri Nations title was claimed for the first time in 10 years.

An Australian team won the Super Rugby crown for the first time since 2004.

Broadcast numbers were at record levels for both Super Rugby and the Wallabies’ international program.

Crowd averages were also up and our three Super Rugby teams involved in direct one team-one town competition with NRL rivals – the Red, Brumbies and Rebels – all won the battle of the turnstiles by drawing higher per game attendances.

The Wallabies finished the season with a winning strike rate touching on 70%.

They sit at No.2 in the world rankings – the same position in which they started the year – and in head to head showdowns with South Africa and New Zealand have an impressive strike rate of recent times.

The Wallabies have beaten New Zealand at two of their last four contests.

Even more impressively, the Wallabies have defeated the Springboks in six of the last seven matches played between the two countries.

In any ordinary year, the above would suggest an outstandingly successful season.

In a Rugby World Cup year, the progression the game has made on and off the field needs to be tempered by the reality that our primary goal – winning an unprecedented third Rugby World Cup title – went unfulfilled.

As an organisation, from the administration to the team, we were disappointed the campaign in New Zealand came up short.

There is no shame in losing to the host nation in the semi finals, nor can it be denied the All Blacks dominated the world rankings for four years and deserved due recognition for their ongoing excellence.

However, the depth of disappointment for Australian Rugby in part reflects the advancements the Wallabies have made since the quarter final exit at the Rugby World Cup in 2007.

There were high hopes and expectations on the squad that travelled to New Zealand.

It was an anticipation fuelled by what had occurred in the previous 12 months.

The All Blacks had been conquered in Hong Kong in October of 2010, and again in Brisbane during the Rugby World Cup countdown – a win that secured the Tri Nations championship.

The emergence of a young, exciting and fearless group of players further heightened the general levels of confidence.

It was indisputable that on their day this Wallabies team could beat, and had beaten, any and every top flight team in the world.

The Wallabies went to New Zealand with the youngest squad at the event, average age just 23 years and 8 months.

Beaten by New Zealand at the semi finals stage, after an epic win over South Africa in the quarter finals, the Wallabies eventually took out the Bronze Medal match with a victory over Wales.

Was the 2011 Rugby World Cup just a touch too early for them? It is fair to debate.

There was no lack of talent. The All Blacks and Springboks had been beaten in the preceding months, and beaten more than once.

The issue remained consistency of performance – a factor synonymous with young teams maturing.

However, there is also no denying that the potential for improvement from the current squad is enormous.

As they garner further experience, the hopes and expectations that were present leading into the Rugby World Cup will only increase.

They have the capacity to be the best team in the world.

Australia has unearthed some of the most gifted talents in the game; the kind of players who thrill and are developing household name status.

Players who can continue to build on the gains the game made in profile and popularity in a Rugby World Cup year.

Those gains came in many and varied forms, some of which I have already referenced.

From a broadcast perspective we landed an audience of 3.23 million for the Rugby World Cup semi final against the All Blacks.

To put that in perspective, the corresponding match at the 2003 Rugby World Cup in Australia – the semi final between the Wallabies and All Blacks – secured a TV audience of 2.4 million, some 800,000 less.

However, the final in 2003 was watched by more than 4 million Australians.

The prospect of outstripping that magical figure in 2011 disappeared when the All Blacks rather than the Wallabies won the Eden Park semi final.

It is also important to note that the crescendo from a public interest viewpoint in October did not come out of the blue.

From the outset of the Australian Rugby season there had been innovation and excitement to harness greater support for the code.

The Melbourne Rebels were launched on the Super Rugby stage, delivering international Rugby to Victoria for the first time – via a local vehicle – and at frequency levels never before experienced.

There was positivity too around the new competition format, where the Conference system and therefore more local derbies were introduced as a fifth Australian team came on line.

It would also be remiss not to make mention of the contribution the Queensland Reds made to Australian Rugby in 2011 as a result of their Super Rugby success.

Their style of play, laced with panache, brilliance and, on occasions, outlandish execution of skill, made them a “not to miss” experience,

Crowds to Suncorp Stadium were climbing in excess of 30,000 and the final delivered 50,000.

The television audiences watching them, across the country, were also substantially up on previous seasons.

It was a Reds-led revival for Rugby at the front end of 2011 and the Wallabies continued to build momentum through their Tri Nations success.

The ultimate aim for the season was a Rugby World Cup final win and that did not eventuate. However, the gains made in 2011 were significant and cannot be ignored.

Nor can the financial impact the Rugby World Cup imposed on Australian Rugby.

The scheduling of the event and the forced inventory cuts we had to make from a Test match perspective – down from six or seven top tier domestic internationals to two plus a match with Samoa – hit ARU hard.

It left us with a $16 million revenue hole.

Add to this the $2.4 million it cost us to prepare, outfit and pay the Wallabies during their Rugby World Cup participation.

All up it is an unavoidable financial hit to the ARU of some $18.5 million. It underscores why the current economic model for the Rugby World Cup is unsustainable. Changes must be made. We cannot bleed like this again.

ARU has worked hard at ensuring any deficit for 2011 will be well below the levels of financial sacrifice made to play at the Rugby World Cup.

However, the same scenario cannot be allowed to play itself out in 2015.”

This article appears as part of a 2011 / 2012 Australian Sports CEO series, exclusive to The Roar.

In this series, John O’Neill (Australian Rugby Union), James Sutherland (Cricket Australia), David Gallop (NRL), Andrew Demetriou (AFL), and Ben Buckley (FFA) all share with The Roar their thoughts on the year that was, or will be, for their respective codes. Read the full series.

The Crowd Says:

2012-01-29T13:56:22+00:00

NSWAFL

Guest


"Crowd averages were also up and our three Super Rugby teams involved in direct one team-one town competition with NRL rivals – the Red, Brumbies and Rebels – all won the battle of the turnstiles by drawing higher per game attendances." In the case of the Reds - wrong. Including the two finals, the home average for the Reds was 33,000. The Broncos average was 35,000. That's a loss, not a win.

2011-12-21T02:56:51+00:00

Bay35Pablo

Roar Guru


Bwhahahahaha!!! That AAP NZ Herald article was written by the Roar's "own" Darren Walton. And is on the Roar. http://www.theroar.com.au/2011/12/13/deans-on-shaky-ground-after-world-cup-flop/ I take it back. Get as bad opinion on the Roar .... :)

2011-12-21T02:50:12+00:00

Bay35Pablo

Roar Guru


The Author was "AAP". But I'm guessing not one of the AAP writers that writes regularly for the Roar. Pretty hilarious they attribute to a wire service what is an opinion piece. And a Deans bashing opinion piece that seems to just recycle the Australian rugby media's bashing of Deans without actually citing any sources or critics. Bloody lazy "reporting". Get better quality opinion on the Roar.

2011-12-16T04:53:09+00:00

Mike

Guest


"Scrums don’t win matches?? Maybe not, but they certainly help. The semifinal is a classic example of that." I am surprised you would use that particular example, because it reinforces my point that the scrum is just one part of a forwards' armoury, and by no means the most important. The All Black forwards were indeed dominant in the semi-final, but the scrum is arguably where they were least dominant. It was their superior aggression and skill in general play that made the difference. "But, the major point you make – that Al Baxters problems were mainly created by incompetent referees. Oh, please! You have to be joking. Any England or NZ props who read that comment would still be laughing." No they wouldn't, because THEY know something about the game. By 2008, there was no sign of any superiority on the part of the England scrum against Baxter. In the 2008 match at Twickenham, Baxter ahd his fellow pigs had a very clear edge over Sheridan, Vickery et al. You don't appear to have watched that match. There have been a couple of times since then where the Australian scrum has been very obviously unfairly penalized, the most notorious being Joubert's woeful performance in July 2009. He clearly had no idea of what was going on, and repeatedly penalized Baxter against Tony Woodcock (of all people –he is notoriously lazy in his bind). That game does not reflect badly on Baxter at all, but it does reflect very badly on Joubert. "Al Baxter was a terrible scrummager, shown up any time the opposition were actually allowed to scrummage." I suspect your problem is that you watched the games in 2005 and 2006, when the Australian scrum under Connolly was at one of its lowest ebbs. You haven't really watched any Wallaby games since. Baxter was no world beater at scrummaging, but he was competent enough, and he has enjoyed some success against his opponents, particularly after Deans took over. "I have no idea who you are but I have many years in rugby and am perfectly entitled to give a view." No-one has suggested you are not entitled to give your views. But if they are contrary to the facts you can expect to be challenged. "Try debating the points instead of just dismissing with abuse." What a perfect description of you! You don't seem able to cope with debate, and you frequently resort to mere abuse when challenged. "Also on the semifinal, NZ gained plenty of advantage by targetting Cooper hidden out on the wing. Richard Kahui made mincemeat of Cooper that day." Are you sure you watched the game? Richard Kahui did indeed have a great match and did very well *defending* against Cooper. Nor do I recall any sign that the All Blacks were particularly "targeting" Cooper as a defender. They were overwhelmingly concerned with neutralizing his attacking skills (which they did very well).

2011-12-14T14:06:15+00:00

Parisien

Guest


Talking about "review", wasn't there a proper review carried out of the Wallabies and their WRC campaign, their coaching, selections, structures and preparation? I don't know whether it was fully independent or not, but has it been published? I'd love to read that!

2011-12-14T02:43:13+00:00

Mike G

Guest


Don't forget Mike G - That guy knows what he's talking about!!

2011-12-14T01:48:34+00:00

Mike

Guest


Thank you Comrade

2011-12-14T01:09:14+00:00

Mike (Now Misha)

Guest


Once upon a time I was the only Mike - but more have appeared. So I'll be Misha from now on...

2011-12-14T00:17:03+00:00

Tiger

Guest


They are both great results, the reds won a lot of hearts this year. Will be interested I see if the people return in 2012!

2011-12-14T00:08:52+00:00

Olddantucker

Guest


Ah...the Waratahs. Let's argue about that rabble for awhile instead, Mike! There's a classic example of over a decade of mismanagement.

2011-12-14T00:01:05+00:00

Olddantucker

Guest


I guess I have very few fans amongst posters named Mike! Oh well, I'm sure I'll cope. I quite like my theories and given this is an opinion site I guess that's all that matters. Scrums don't win matches?? Maybe not, but they certainly help. The semifinal is a classic example of that. But, the major point you make - that Al Baxters problems were mainly created by incompetent referees. Oh, please! You have to be joking. Any England or NZ props who read that comment would still be laughing. Al Baxter was a terrible scrummager, shown up any time the opposition were actually allowed to scrummage. Look, he's a nice bloke and I know the Aussie rugby community is tight, but give us a break. He was shite. And as for simply saying my theories aren't any good - well, my theories are no less or more valid than yours. I have no idea who you are but I have many years in rugby and am perfectly entitled to give a view. Try debating the points instead of just dismissing with abuse. Also on the semifinal, NZ gained plenty of advantage by targetting Cooper hidden out on the wing. Richard Kahui made mincemeat of Cooper that day. But then apparently the scrum was okay too, so perhaps you watched a different game.

2011-12-13T21:44:07+00:00

Mike

Guest


Thanks Matt, its heartening stuff. Well, in a way its not, as I'm in NSW! But we can learn from the Reds' achievements.

2011-12-13T21:07:50+00:00

Matt

Guest


Bit late to the party, but I wonder if anyone has read this article about Queensland Rugby in 2011. Makes for some increadibly positive reading and backs up a lot of the postiive points made by JON: http://www.sarugby.com/news.cfm?newsid=19342 Found it on the SARU website this morning and was surpised it hasn't appeared on the Roar yet. I'm too busy at work this morning to post it as a stand alone article, which it probably warrants...hint hint

2011-12-13T21:01:04+00:00

kovana

Guest


Okay,, I think there is an error in some statements saying the Reds got Higher per avg attendance. Regular round fixtures....Reds had an average near 30k The Broncos had higher per average crowds... And even including Finals the Reds averaged around 33K+ but the Broncos had 35K+ So.... Broncos had higher average attendance.. But its good the Reds got close.

2011-12-13T13:54:11+00:00

Yikes

Guest


Crazy horse, yes.

2011-12-13T11:56:34+00:00

Tiger

Guest


So you don't know!

2011-12-13T11:40:49+00:00

mikeylives

Guest


Yeh, I'm afraid Mike is right there old dan. Your "theories" aren't much chop.

2011-12-13T11:20:55+00:00

allblackfan

Guest


whoops, my bad!:-)

2011-12-13T11:02:32+00:00

p.Tah

Guest


The Reds drew 35465... :)

2011-12-13T10:05:14+00:00

tiger

Guest


double post, sorry!

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar